• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Tabata comments on Final Fantasy XV for Nintendo Switch, currently no plan

I'm talking about people arguing that there is no actual merit to the viewpoint that the hardware power matters. Supposedly because devs could just cut and cut and cut anything in particular for whatever cost or whatever investment to downgrade said game, and if they don't do that they hate Nintendo and 'how dare they' because they didn't want to do that.

But I'm asking, are there any people who are literally saying that the hardware difference doesn't matter at all? I don't think there are. Hardware capability always matters for any game developed, port or exclusive.

It's just that hardware will not be an insurmountable problem this time. Definitely still a problem, but probably not as big of one as install base and RoI.
 

Rodin

Member
Probably still wouldn't run without significant downgrades

I think it wouldn't be able to run FFX without significant downgrades.

Are you for real?

We are about to get rid about "PS3 limitations", we don't need "Switch limitations" now, thank you.

There's no such thing gameplay wise. Switch version would be technically downgraded and that's it, not sure how this would affect PS4 and PC players.
 

sphinx

the piano man
So then what's Steep? Or NBA2K18?

my definition of "AAA" includes aiming for state-of-the-art, cutting-edge visual and technical performance by 2017 standards. Something that would require substantial effort to run on OG PS4/X1 and would feel just right on Pro/Scorpio/modern PC.

to be honest I have no idea whether Steep or NBA2k18 meet that criteria.

what I do know is that, by my definition, Switch won't run that type of games, no matter what kind of custom chip Nvidia put in there.
 

Tyaren

Member
FFXV already brings PS4 and Xbox One to their knees, how would the Switch be able to handle that game? In 480p and 15fps maybe. ;)
 
Yes, hardware performance matters, and yes, userbase matters, but audience demographics matter significantly more than either of them.

If publishers perceived a significant audience for AAA games primarily targeted at Western male gamers aged ~17-35 on Switch, it'd be getting plenty of those games even if it required more work than PS4/XB1/PC.

They don't, so it's only getting token support, just like Wii U before it.
 

LordRaptor

Member
what I do know is that, by my definition, Switch won't run that type of games, no matter what kind of custom chip Nvidia put in there.

If your definition of AAA games is 'games the switch can't run', then sure, by your definition the Switch is never going to get any AAA games, as per definition.
 
my definition of "AAA" includes aiming for state-of-the-art, cutting-edge visual and technical performance by 2017 standards. Something that would require substantial effort to run on OG PS4/X1 and would feel just right on Pro/Scorpio/modern PC.

to be honest I have no idea whether Steep od NBA2k18 meet that criteria.

what I do know is that, by my definition, Switch won't run that type of games, no matter what kind of custmo chip Nvidia put in there.

If your definition is saying that this state of the art cutting edge visual performance is only "just right" on PS4 Pro/Scorpio, then, by that same definition, PS4 and XB1 won't be able to run those AAA games. PS4/XB1 games will be downgraded compared to Pro/Scorpio, just like those games will be downgraded on Switch compared to PS4/XB1, but there is absolutely no technical reason those games won't be able to run on the Switch.

Does that mean developers will go through the trouble of downgrading and porting those games? Not necessarily. But people seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of how games are designed and scaled, and just putting out some blanket statement about games not even being possible to run on the Switch is frankly kind of ignorant. Especially when we don't know the actual hardware inside of the Switch.

Yes, hardware performance matters, and yes, userbase matters, but audience demographics matter significantly more than either of them.

If publishers perceived a significant audience for AAA games primarily targeted at Western male gamers aged ~17-35 on Switch, it'd be getting plenty of those games even if it required more work than PS4/XB1/PC.

They don't, so it's only getting token support, just like Wii U before it.

Exactly this, but I'd say that install base and audience composition are related to each other. If this gets an install base similar to the Wii (not predicting it will) then AAA devs will very likely change their mind about ROI just due to the sheer volume of gamers.
 

Inuhanyou

Believes Dragon Quest is a franchise managed by Sony
But I'm asking, are there any people who are literally saying that the hardware difference doesn't matter at all? I don't think there are. Hardware capability always matters for any game developed, port or exclusive.

It's just that hardware will not be an insurmountable problem this time. Definitely still a problem, but probably not as big of one as install base and RoI.


I've heard plenty of people make the argument that hardware power doesn't matter at all to ports if the userbase willing to buy the product is strong enough.

I mean, that's completely fair. but that's a far cry from hardware not posing a problem for developers or that effecting whether or not publishers consider it worth a port. Its definitely a significant factor into how much investment devs and publishers put into it
 

KtSlime

Member
Nah, their spin-offs are doing just fine. Tabata san lighted the way, now Ito sets the world on fire.

After the cost of 15 which did not nearly sell enough and struggled to (maybe) reach a million sales in Japan, I imagine SE is rethinking their -better graphics PS4 only strategy-. I know people will point to the west, but don't forget that Final Fantasy does not live on game sales alone, but also knick-knacks, tie-ins, figures, spin-offs etc. Final Fantasy popularity in Japan suffering will be felt.
 
I've heard plenty of people make the argument that hardware power doesn't matter at all to ports if the userbase willing to buy the product is strong enough.

I mean, that's completely fair. but that's a far cry from hardware not posing a problem for developers or that effecting whether or not publishers consider it worth a port. Its definitely a significant factor into how much investment devs and publishers put into it

I'll certainly agree that hardware is a factor, I just don't think it's the biggest one. I don't think it's even close to the biggest one. If a publisher sees an audience on the Switch which they believe will buy a significant amount of a certain title, you can bet your ass they'll port that title regardless of the downgrades necessary. See CoD on the Wii, one of which outsold the PS3 counterpart (not that that's shocking, given the install base size, but that's kinda exactly my point).
 

royox

Member
There's no such thing gameplay wise. Switch version would be technically downgraded and that's it, not sure how this would affect PS4 and PC players.

PC, PS3 and PS4 players play together. If something can't run on PS3 it won't be done for PS4 or PC. That's why we can't have cool limit breaks, why summoners can't summon or why the boss battles are like they are (99% of them just circles with the boss in the middle).

Now they are finishing the PS3 support to improve the whole game, make better and more spectacular boss battles, bigger areas, more skills, improve the gameplay and a large etc. adding the game a new hardware limitator like the Switch is a no-no for ANY FFXIV player.
 

JBwB

Member
No surprise there.

At this point I think there really needs to be a designated thread for games that aren't heading to the Switch now haha.
 

brad-t

Member
Square will throw Nintendo some bones and I guess that is all we can expect. I'm still wondering if Square will ever give a Nintendo system any kind of decent support...

3DS says hey, and is probably a better indicator of SE's potential output for Switch than the Wii/U.
 

Malakai

Member
Yes, hardware performance matters, and yes, userbase matters, but audience demographics matter significantly more than either of them.

If publishers perceived a significant audience for AAA games primarily targeted at Western male gamers aged ~17-35 on Switch, it'd be getting plenty of those games even if it required more work than PS4/XB1/PC.

They don't, so it's only getting token support, just like Wii U before it.

That tired catch all argument of "audience demographics" isn't going to work with Square, a company that release a "World of Final Fantasy" for the PS4 and Vita and Dragon Quest Builders for PS4, PS3 and Vita and the fact that Dragon Quest games sales well on Nintendo platforms....
 

jj984jj

He's a pretty swell guy in my books anyway.
They haven't made any FF announcements for Switch so I doubt we'll see any before HW sales come in. FFXV probably isn't happening either way though. At least they're bringing DQ to the system, and if it HW sales are good DQXI might sell decently.
 

Famassu

Member
I'll certainly agree that hardware is a factor, I just don't think it's the biggest one. I don't think it's even close to the biggest one. If a publisher sees an audience on the Switch which they believe will buy a significant amount of a certain title, you can bet your ass they'll port that title regardless of the downgrades necessary. See CoD on the Wii, one of which outsold the PS3 counterpart (not that that's shocking, given the install base size, but that's kinda exactly my point).
COD is a linear shooter, FFXV is an open world game, fully streamed with some pretty complex physics, animations, character models, effects, lighting, huge draw distance + you can fly high in the air. I'd imagine the game would have to be botched pretty hard for it to be possible on Switch.

I mean, one of the big reasons why FFXV is exclusively on current-gen consoles and not a PS3 + PS4 & X1 cross-gen game like they were developing it for awhile is because PS3-level hardware was too weak and they didn't want to compromise.
 

Malakai

Member
3DS says hey, and is probably a better indicator of SE's potential output for Switch than the Wii/U.

In the West, Square could even be bother to release their own 3DS games. In all honesty, their DS support a lot better than their 3DS support.
 
And how many of them was exclusive on the PS4 besides FF XV?
PS4 exclusivity has nothing to do with what I said. I'm honestly confused at the point you're trying to make here. The PS4 and XB1 are similar in capability and both have a market share large enough to justify developing expensive games.

The Wii-U doesn't check either of those boxes, and I bet the same could be said of the switch. Once again Nintendo has chosen to create a console with a massive power deficit when compared with the other current gen consoles, leading to increased difficulty and cost of porting games. Couple that with historically poor performance of third party games on Nintendo consoles (and the poor performance of the Wii-U in general) and it becomes pretty obvious why companies are skipping (or at least taking a wait-and-see approach on) the Switch.
 

Malakai

Member
PS4 exclusivity has nothing to do with what I said. I'm honestly confused at the point you're trying to make here. The PS4 and XB1 are similar in capability and both have a market share large enough to justify developing expensive games.

The Wii-U doesn't check either of those boxes, and I bet the same could be said of the switch. Once again Nintendo has chosen to create a console with a massive power deficit when compared with the other current gen consoles, leading to increased difficulty and cost of porting games. Couple that with historically poor performance of third party games on Nintendo consoles (and the poor performance of the Wii-U in general) and it becomes pretty obvious why companies are skipping (or at least taking a wait-and-see approach on) the Switch.

A lot of Square releases have been on the Vita as well as the PS3. Power wasn't an issue.
 
Really...? I thought graphically the Switch was at best, on par with the Vita?

The Switch is much, much more powerful than a Vita. Also more modern and capable of running third-party engines. There's no UE4 support on Vita, for instance.

Just for the game to have a chance of hitting 30fps (and likely still not doing it), they would have to rewrite most of the engine/game code to use ARM cpu instructions, use much lower-poly models with low-res textures and simplified materials, replace all dynamic lighting with static pre-baked, reduce amount of light sources on screen, make the day-night cycle switch between pre-baked times of day (maybe even ditch it completely), remove cloud and sky simulation and replace with static skybox, remove or simplify most shaders, simplify/remove weather system, severely downgrade all particle fx/fog, remove physics based animation, reduce draw distance and LOD, downgrade grass/shrubs/trees, make cutscenes into movie files instead of realtime (like ffxiii), dynamic 900p docked, up to 720p mobile.

If only there was some kind of computer software designed for this purpose.
 
Fry-Im-Shocked-Futurama.gif
Thereitis.gif
 
Not surprising in the least.

However, I wouldn't be surprised to see the Steam/PS4 port of FF7 also ported to the Switch, especially when that Cloud amiibo finally comes out.

Prooobably not FF7 Remake though.
 

Toa Axis

Member
Business Division 2. It's the FF team basically.

Not quite. They are merely one of several teams that have worked on Final Fantasy. In fact, until FFXV, they've only worked on spin-offs and handheld games.

Business Division 5, the FFXIV team, is actually hiring for what is seemingly a big single player game, which many are thinking will be FFXVI.
 

kswiston

Member
That'll be my reaction when mainline FF becomes mobile first.

Ignoring the part where FFXV had pretty healthy sales for the series, there would be no point in making a mainline mobile game. Stuff like Record Keeper and Brave Exvius already get to use the characters from the entire series to get people to drop that Gatcha money. They can continue to use the mainline and spin off games on console to fuel the character libraries of those games and whatever they cook up for the future.

I'm surprised that they haven't tried to rip off Hearthstone yet.
 

Oregano

Member
Not quite. They are merely one of several teams that have worked on Final Fantasy. In fact, until FFXV, they've only worked on spin-offs and handheld games.

Business Division 5, the FFXIV team, is actually hiring for what is seemingly a big single player game, which many are thinking will be FFXVI.

True, should have said FFXV team.
 

Malakai

Member
I wonder if that's why I also mentioned market share?

And please show me the mainline, AAA, brand-spanking-new final fantasy game that came out on the Vita.

Why wasn't 3DS the lead platform for World of Final Fantasy then that device have the greatest market share in Japan currently...Or why didn't the 3DS didn't even get I Am Setsuna.
 

KtSlime

Member
Dragon Quest XI is coming to the Switch. /end of discusssion

Pretty much this, DQ is the only franchise SE has yet to put on the path to irrelivence.

Why wasn't 3DS the lead platform for World of Final Fantasy then that device have the greatest market share in Japan currently...Or why didn't the 3DS didn't even get I Am Setsuna.

That's easy to answer, because SE is horribly mismanaged.
 
Why wasn't 3DS the lead platform for World of Final Fantasy then that device have the greatest market share in Japan currently...Or why didn't the 3DS didn't even get I Am Setsuna.
I wonder if that's why I also mentioned power?

You're hilarious.

Also: worldwide sales are more important than Japan-only sales.
 

Jerm411

Member
G: Is there any possibility for Final Fantasy XV to be released on Nintendo Switch?

HT: There are no Plans, it wouldn’t run…

G: It wouldn’t run at all?

HT: It might run… But we haven’t conducted the proper tests on whether it would run properly on Switch or not, so I cannot say for sure.

giphy.gif
 

kswiston

Member
Pretty much this, DQ is the only franchise SE has yet to put on the path to irrelivence.

Final Fantasy XV has outsold every Dragon Quest entry to date worldwide.

Also, you mention drops in merchandise in Japan giving them pause, but merch accounted for 2% of S-E's net sales last year. Digital Software was 74%.
 

Oregano

Member
I wonder if that's why I also mentioned power?

You're hilarious.

Also: worldwide sales are more important than Japan-only sales.

I don't think I am Setsuna or WoFF have sold particularly well outside of Japan(or inside of Japan).

Square Enix definitely makes some questionable decisions though. The new Itadaki Street is Vita/PS4 for instance and power can't be the reason there.
 

KtSlime

Member
Final Fantasy XV has outsold every Dragon Quest entry to date worldwide.

Also, you mention drops in merchandise in Japan giving them pause, but merch accounted for 2% of S-E's net sales last year. Digital Software was 74%.

Digital software is mostly smartphone, and in Japan right? If they damage their brands in Japan their smartphone gacha games will suffer.

But yes you are correct, if you look globally FF is the bigger franchise.
 
Top Bottom